Fiddling With 6th - Skills (first of ??)

[Black Rose]

I don't know how many of these I will actually do, since I'm pretty cool with almost all of the HERO system... except skills. Oh, don't get me wrong, it covers a broad range of needs quite admirably, and I think Knowledge, Professional, and Science Skills - and the attendant Area, Culture, and Trivia (mine own invention) Skills - are one of the most elegant designs I've ever come across, but I do have one little quibble. And it's a quibble that I've seen done better elsewhere - which bugs the crap out of me, frankly, since, IMO, HERO should be doing everything better. Okay, enough pussyfooting.

I don't like the quick jump from 8- to 11- (or 12- if you know what you're doing with your points); a jump from 25.9% to 62.5% (or 74.1%). There's no granularity, just a quick jump from a one in four shot to a two in three (or three in four). And with no skill levels adding to Familiarities, there's really no way to make a mild lift on your own.

I wish that you could add Skill Levels to Cramming. I'd be willing to buy Skill Levels that only added to Cramming, if I could do it. And I know I can do it, in my own games at least; I mean it makes no sense to me that you can't in general. Wait, I take that back; I do see the desire to prevent the PC from studying for several hours and becoming a Nobel prize-winning whatever, but let's be honest, any number of things left lying around in FREd could blow your campaign to flinders if you're not careful.

This last one is not so much a beef with HERO as it is a wistful kudos to another system; JAGS, to be specific. The skill system in JAGS is two layered; one is the Skill Level (the 3d6 roll we all know and love) and the Expertise Level (one to four, covering beginner to master). How does this work? Well, in all fairness, I should just link you and say, "Go to JAGS Rules, then to Basic Book 2, then to page 2 and read the bit about Level of Expertise, but I'll try to summarise. Basic difficulties are assumed to be "Average"; i.e., Level 2. If you are a Beginner, you get a -3 to any Average roll, a -6 to any Expert roll, and a -9 to any Master roll. If you are Average, you basically get +3 to your roll, almost always to only cover penalties; Expert and Master each get another +3, cumulative. Now, I know what you're thinking; "Couldn't you just do this with Skill Levels, or -yawn- having the skills at a high enough level?" Well, you could, but here's the thing; it is possible, using this skill system, to be both successful (the skill roll) and not all that great at it (the expertise level). Or vice versa. You get the picture. The Expertise Level covers your skill, where the skill roll covers your success rate. I know that just made little to no sense (blame lack of sleep; I plan to ), but if you take a look at it, it makes a rather lovely kind of sense. Then again, I have a thing for elegant solutions.

So. I have thrown down the gauntlet. Does anyone have anything to add?

[drnuncheon]

Well, let's look at whether the added complexity actually grants us anything. Let's say we've got a lock to pick.

Option 1 uses your suggested system, Option 2 uses stock HERO. The lock is difficult, so the picker takes a -3 to his roll.

1: "I've got a 12- in lockpicking, but I'm an Expert-level lockpicker, so I can ignore the -3, giving me a 12-."

2: "I've got a 15- in lockpicking, so I wind up with a 12-."

Hmm.

it is possible, using this skill system, to be both successful (the skill roll) and not all that great at it (the expertise level). Or vice versa.

I don't think I'm seeing the difference here, honestly - even in your JAGS system, a higher skill level has the same effect as a higher level of mastery. The only thing that you get that you couldn't with HERO is (say) a Master locksmith who is only capable of opening easy locks on a 12-, but he can open the toughest locks on a 12- as well. That doesn't make much sense to me, and you could do it with limited skill levels if you really wanted such an effect.

I think it's added complexity without added value.

J

[Sociotard]

All I can say is "How long before Steve puts out The Ultimate Skill?" Skills really are underused in many campaigns, and this would help counter that.

[Steve Long]

As I've mentioned a couple of times in chats and other threads, I sort of plink away at The Ultimate Skill as time allows. Unfortunately, time hasn't allowed much plinking for the past couple months, since the main publication schedule this year is 50% heavier than last year. And lately I've been spending my "plinking" time getting a head start on 5ER or other projects moreso than working on TUSk.

But have no fear -- I haven't forgotten my beloved Skills book! I'll be getting back to it as time and interest allow. If necessary, sooner or later we'll put it on the production schedule so I can allot full working time to it.

[Christougher]

Well, my thought on skills is fired by the 1 point 8 or less familiarities, while an emergy attempt at something without a skill is often given the same 8 or less roll, for free. The lack of a step between an 8 or less familiarity and the full skill for three points, usually 12 or 13 or less.

I haven't implemented it, but I'm considering making the free/everyman rolls a 7 or less, the 1 point familiarity as a 9 or less (Hmm, is it a coincidence this is equal to 9 + CHA/5?), and 2 points with any skill as an 11 or less.

A much more radical revision would be to convert all the "named" skills to something like a Professional Skill or Knowledge Skill, possibly inventing some sort of Physical or Performance Skill, but that clashes with PS'es.

[Madstone]

Well, my thought on skills is fired by the 1 point 8 or less familiarities, while an emergy attempt at something without a skill is often given the same 8 or less roll, for free. The lack of a step between an 8 or less familiarity and the full skill for three points, usually 12 or 13 or less.

I haven't implemented it, but I'm considering making the free/everyman rolls a 7 or less, the 1 point familiarity as a 9 or less (Hmm, is it a coincidence this is equal to 9 + CHA/5?), and 2 points with any skill as an 11 or less.

There are some good ideas in this thread. I agree with eliminating the drastic jump, and giving familiarity an advantage over emergency. I've been thinking about the above system myself, and I might just go ahead and implement it. It's an elegant solution that separates the emergency roll from the familiarity nicely, while reducing that drastic jump.

0: Emergency 7- *
1: Familiarity 9-
2: Basic Knowledge 11-
3: Trained Skill (INT Roll)

Yeah, I like this idea. Cramming would then result in 9- roll, too, making it a tad more useful, but none of this is overwhelming.


*(still must be an applicable skill. No emergency rolls in quantum physics)

[Dust Raven]

I generally allow 5 point "group" levels to be used with appropriate 8- Familiarities, and 10 point overall levels witn all 8-, including Cramming.

I do agree that there needs to be some sort of rule that allows skills between 8- and 11- that doesn't involve having Characteristics below 10.

I would also like to see some sort of alternate "default skill" system instead of Everyman skills and Familiarities. I see no reason why my flat footed 10 DEX thug should be just as good at Acrobatics as your 43 DEX speedster if all we each pay is 1 point for a Familarity.

[pinecone]

I do the same thing with levels Dust Raven does. I agree that have Fams of 9 rather than 8 is elegant and workable. The unerlying assumption is clean...Hmmm a fam is 9 or less, a full skill adds in the relevant stat...that makes sense......It seems to me that making skills important is a style thing, but I'd bet that a big book o'skills would help more people bring skills to the forefront....I'd also like to see PSLs cleaned up as well...guess I've got some reading to do.....

[MadWand]

One thing I think the D20 system does better than ther HERO system is in standardizing the skill and combat system. Everything is the same: roll a d20, add a modifier, check to see if you overcame a difficulty. I think the HERO system could easily modified to work the same way. Attack rolls are 3d6+OCV, which must defeat 11+opponents DCV. Skill rolls should be 3d6+Stat bonus+skill bonuses, which must overcome a GM-set difficulty. You could do familiarities multiple ways, or even dispense with the concept altogether: You no longer buy "skills" at all, just skill levels that add to your roll. Certain skills would be "trained skills only", which can only be attempted with at least 1 (or perhaps sometimes more) skill levels in a certain skill. Other skills can be attempted with a base roll of 3d6+stat bonus.
Perhaps a 1 point familiarity would allow a character to attempt 3d6+stat bonus rolls for trained skills, without buying skill levels for that skill. A character could later spend 1 more point to turn the familiarity into a normal +1 skill level. Familiarities would be unnecessesary for skills that may be untrained normally.
This system also removes the need for most "everyman" skills quite nicely.

Tell me what you think. Workable?

[acowie]

I suspect that if HERO was just coming out now it would use a 3d6+OCV vs 10 +DCV target - several groups already do. It's really easy and doesn't require any tweaking.
To get exact mathematical equivalence in skill rolls is a bit clunky. We have used an easy target of 10, standard of 12 and hard of 14, with a 3pt skill giving you a +of STAT/5 (ie DEX 18 gives you a +4 to DEX rolls, or a 3pt Acrobatics). For exact equivalence 2 pt skills (11-) give you +2, and 1 pt familiarity should give you a -1, but we say 0.
Once it's up and running though, it just seems much smoother, exactly like when d20 went 3rd edition. I've even had d20 junkies previously freaked by HERO understanding the system much more easily.
The problem is what you do with all the old characters available.

[Mentor]

There are some good ideas in this thread. I agree with eliminating the drastic jump, and giving familiarity an advantage over emergency. I've been thinking about the above system myself, and I might just go ahead and implement it. It's an elegant solution that separates the emergency roll from the familiarity nicely, while reducing that drastic jump.

0: Emergency 7- *
1: Familiarity 9-
2: Basic Knowledge 11-
3: Trained Skill (INT Roll)

Yeah, I like this idea. Cramming would then result in 9- roll, too, making it a tad more useful, but none of this is overwhelming.


*(still must be an applicable skill. No emergency rolls in quantum physics)

Very nice. While I am not really looking to change anything yet in our campaign, which is very skill intensive, there is an elegant logic to your suggestion.

[Trebuchet]

There are some good ideas in this thread. I agree with eliminating the drastic jump, and giving familiarity an advantage over emergency. I've been thinking about the above system myself, and I might just go ahead and implement it. It's an elegant solution that separates the emergency roll from the familiarity nicely, while reducing that drastic jump.

0: Emergency 7- *
1: Familiarity 9-
2: Basic Knowledge 11-
3: Trained Skill (INT Roll)

Yeah, I like this idea. Cramming would then result in 9- roll, too, making it a tad more useful, but none of this is overwhelming.


*(still must be an applicable skill. No emergency rolls in quantum physics)

I like this idea, but I would use different numbers:

0 Emergency: 6-
1 Familiarity: 8-
2 Basic Skill: 10-
3 Trained: (CHAR Roll)

This gives a base 50% probability of success for a 2 pt. Basic Skill and 3 points now provides the standard relevant CHARACTERISTIC roll.

[Vanguard00]

I like this idea, but I would use different numbers:

0 Emergency: 6-
1 Familiarity: 8-
2 Basic Skill: 10-
3 Trained: (CHAR Roll)

This gives a base 50% probability of success for a 2 pt. Basic Skill and 3 points now provides the standard relevant CHARACTERISTIC roll.

I like this idea better, as well, since there are times when [9+(CHAR/5)] = 11. I'd hate to see people buying the "2 pt" version rather than the "3 pt" version to get the same results.

[AlHazred]

Another thing you might want to consider is "Cascade Skills." This is the idea (used in several other game systems) where a "Skill" is not the ability to do one single thing; rather, each Skill covers several related abilities. For instance, in DragonQuest, the Thief Skill allowed you to Open Locks, Find Traps, Disarm Traps, etc.

To apply this idea to the ones floating around here, perhaps you could define "Cascade Packages" for your campaign; a 1-point (or 3-point, or 5-point, or whatever) investment nets you a 7- (or 8-, or 6-, or whatever) roll with a group of related abilities. You could have the Thief Cascade with Security Systems, Lockpicking, Eavesdropping, and so on. Then, when a character wants to be better at one particular thing, he pays points towards improving it. This way, you maintain the exclusivity of people who invest in skills (i.e., they can try things other, less skill-intensive, characters can't) but still maintain your granularity.

In this system, there are no Everyman Skills, per se. You get a Cultural Cascade with the relevant Everyman Skills in it.

[TheEmerged]

My biggie would be some way of adjudicating the difference of scale with the KS/PS/SS series in particular. Personally I apply a -2 penalty for each "step" of difference, and try to limit it to 4 steps per skill. I've toyed with making the first step "up" only -1.

To me, there's something wrong when KS: Superhuman World and KS: Champions (the group) cost the same -- and under the default rules KS:SW will tell you everything KS:C would and more, and it's KS:C that is restricted in use. Either the costs should be different, or KS:SW should be penalized if a more specific KS would be appropriate.

Personally I've had success with the second model -- although it's sometimes difficult to break the skill into steps when I'm not terribly familiar with the skill myself. The following is my breakdown for KS:SW as an example.

• Superhuman World
• By region (America, Eurasia, etc) OR by broad affiliation (UNTIL, PRIMUS, Teragen, etc.)
• By team (Champions, Protectors, CLOWN, Ultimates, etc)
• By individual (Defender, Ironclad, Binder, etc)